scam ads – Santa Clara County sues Meta over alleged scam ad profits, while watchdogs and other plaintiffs press similar claims.
Meta is once again in the legal spotlight as Santa Clara County moves to sue the company over scam advertisements appearing on Facebook and Instagram.
The lawsuit was filed by County Counsel Tony LoPresti. who alleges that Meta has benefited financially from what he describes as a large. self-sustaining “ecosystem” of scam ads.. The case centers on claims that scams have targeted senior citizens and other vulnerable users. turning the platforms into vehicles for fraud.
According to the filing. the county’s allegations draw on earlier reporting that pointed to internal documentation about scam advertisers spending heavily across Meta’s services.. That earlier report said scam advertisers poured billions of dollars into Meta’s platforms. and the filing further claims that Meta can earn as much as $7 billion a year from scam-related advertising.. It also argues that Meta’s own systems and policies have, at least in part, helped scams persist.
Santa Clara. located just next door to Meta’s Bay Area headquarters. framed the lawsuit as a response rooted in local enforcement and consumer protection.. LoPresti said publicly that while the region has benefited from the tech boom. officials cannot ignore the allegation that a major technology company is swindling the public in order to meet revenue goals.
Meta, for its part, rejected the complaint and said it will fight the case.. In a statement. a Meta spokesperson argued that the county’s claims depend on reporting that the company said misrepresents Meta’s motivations while overlooking the company’s broader efforts to combat scams.. Meta also emphasized that scams are “not good for” the company or the people and businesses that rely on its services.
The company pointed to its reported efforts to remove and disrupt scam activity.. In particular. Meta said it removed more than 159 million scam ads in the prior year alone. while also claiming it has launched additional tools intended to protect users and partnered with law enforcement internationally to interfere with criminal operations.
Scrutiny over scam ads has not been limited to government action.. On Tuesday, a nonprofit watchdog group published findings focused on Medicare-related scams on Facebook aimed at seniors.. The report said Meta made more than $14 million from Medicare scam ads. and it claimed that some of the offending accounts had a history of repeat activity. with many ads reportedly removed in earlier instances.
That same watchdog report also described tactics that it said mirror patterns seen in other categories of fraudulent advertising.. It specifically referenced scams using fabricated AI-generated celebrity endorsements. a technique that can make scams look more credible by borrowing familiar faces and recognizable styles to lure victims.
In statements tied to the watchdog findings, Meta again defended its approach, arguing that scammers increasingly use sophisticated methods to evade detection both on Meta’s platforms and beyond them. The company repeated that it works to aggressively fight scams on and off its services.
Meta’s newest lawsuit arrives as additional legal pressure continues from other quarters.. Last month. a nonprofit consumer group filed a proposed class action in Washington D.C.. alleging that Meta violated consumer protection laws through how it handled scam advertisements.. The filing pointed to ads that promoted “free” iPhones and offered $1. 400 checks—examples the plaintiff said were meant to exploit consumers.
For Meta. these cases collectively raise a difficult question that extends beyond whether scams are detected in any single incident: what responsibility. if any. should a platform bear when fraudulent content repeatedly appears despite enforcement processes.. The lawsuits and watchdog findings also suggest that regulators and advocates are focusing on the business incentives and ad-delivery mechanisms that determine how quickly scam content is surfaced or monetized.
At the same time. the company’s response highlights the counter-argument many platforms make in similar disputes: that scam enforcement is continuous and that removals. tooling. and cooperation with authorities are part of how scams are reduced.. The outcome of these legal fights may therefore hinge on what courts determine about intent. knowledge. and whether enforcement efforts were sufficient relative to the scale and persistence alleged by plaintiffs.
As more agencies and watchdog groups document alleged patterns in scam advertising. the pressure on platforms to tighten controls on ad systems. verification. and repeat-offender detection is likely to intensify.. For users—especially seniors and other high-risk groups—these disputes ultimately matter because they shape how quickly scam ads can be identified and how effectively repeat fraud can be stopped before victims are drawn in.
Meta lawsuit scam ads Facebook Instagram online fraud cybersecurity and ads legal action against Meta